Hendon Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that patients were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of patients and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that patients could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating had stayed the same. This meant patient’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for patients to give feedback. Patients were well informed about their treatment. They were able to access the service when they needed it and received the right care in line with national standards.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

The service made sure patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with patients, how to respond to any relevant changes inpatient’s needs.

Consultants assessed patients before admission, explained treatment options, and remained responsible for their care throughout admission and discharge. Nursing staff participated in consultant reviews and helped coordinate discharge arrangements around individual needs.

If staff identified during pre-admission assessments that the service could not meet the patient’s needs, staff would not treat the patient at the hospital. They would refer the patient to an alternative health care provider instead who could support the patient. The hospital did not have the facilities to support the care of patients with complex healthcare needs. Therefore, this patient group was not admitted to the hospital.

Staff planned discharge requirements before admission and coordinated support services when required. Staff told us delayed discharges were rare because patients' care pathways had usually been organised in advance.

Managers made sure staff and patients could access interpreters or signers when needed. Information on interpreting services was readily available.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of patients and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

There was continuity of care to ensure that all the procedures required from the start of treatment until the end were arranged and joined up. Staff understood the needs and preferences of people with protected characteristics.

A discharge planning tool was incorporated to patient notes.

Patients were all given the ward telephone number and advised to call the ward if they had any concerns post treatment.

Managers ensured that patients who did not attend appointments were contacted to make alternative arrangements. This was done by the service’s bookings team.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

All staff had access, through secure logins, to the organisation's intranet to gain information relating to policies, procedures, national guidance, and e-learning. All staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate the use of the system and retrieve information.

The service made it easy for patients to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They involved patients in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

All staff we spoke with were aware of the service’s complaints procedure. Clinical staff told us they always tried to resolve any issues or complaints at the time they were raised. Staff said learning from complaints and concerns was communicated to them at handover meetings and in emails.

There were policies and processes in place to support patients who wanted to raise concerns and complaints about their care and treatment.

The service provided complaints data for the period December 2025 to May 2026. During this period, the service received 19 complaints. Most complaints were investigated and closed, and all completed stage 1 investigations were upheld. The service identified learning from complaints and used this to improve patient care and experience. Learning included improving communication with patients, strengthening booking, and scheduling processes, and reviewing patient records accuracy.

One complaint remained overdue at the time of reporting and related to charges applied to a patient following a did not attend (DNA) appointment.

The service made sure that patients could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service had arrangements in place to ensure continuous RMO cover was available throughout the day and night. Rota records for April, May and June 2026 demonstrated that a named RMO was scheduled to provide 24-hour medical cover, with planned arrangements in place to manage annual leave and periods of absence through designated cover doctors.

The records demonstrated that medical cover remained available during weekdays, weekends, evenings, and overnight periods. Staffing arrangements showed that the provider planned to maintain continuity of care and reduce the risk of gaps in medical provision. There was evidence of a structured rota system that enabled the service to respond to patients' medical needs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff ensured patient records were updated after each appointment. This ensured that any discussions between the patient and staff member were recorded and any actions that had been agreed were all logged.

Doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals worked together as a team to benefit patients. They supported each other to provide good care. Staff ensured patient records were updated after each appointment; this was to ensure that any discussions between the patient and staff were recorded and any actions that had been agreed were all logged.